World War, 1914-1918 -- Naval operations -- Submarine; World War, 1914-1918 -- United States
24. The Prime Minister only two days ago expressed to me the opinion
that it ought to be possible to find physical means of absolutely
sealing up all escape for submarines from their own ports. The fact that
all such methods (nets, mines, obstructions, etc.) inherently involve
the added necessity of continuous protection and maintenance by our own
Naval forces is seldom understood and appreciated. I finally convinced
the Prime Minister of the fallacy of such propositions by describing the
situations into which we would be led: namely, that in order to maintain
our obstructions we would have to match the forces the enemy brought
against them, until finally the majority if not all of our forces would
be forced into dangerous areas where they would be subject to continual
torpedo and other attack, in fact in a position most favourable to the
enemy.
25. Entirely outside of the fact that the enemy does, and always can,
force exits, and thereby nullify the close blockade, the weather is a
serious added difficulty. The heaviest anchors obtainable have been used
for nets, mines, and obstructions, only to have the arduous work of
weeks swept away in a few hours of heavy weather. Moorings will not
hold. They chafe through. In this respect we could be of great
assistance, i.e. in supply of moorings and buoys.
26. The Channel is not now, and never has been, completely sealed
against submarine egress, let alone the vaster areas of escape to the
north. Submarines have gone under mine-fields, and have succeeded in
unknown ways in evading and cutting through nets and obstructions.
27. In addition to submarines, heavy forces are free to raid, and in
fact escape through, the Channel at any time when the enemy decides that
the necessity or return will justify the risk. Hence the suggestion that
two divisions of our fast Dreadnoughts might be based upon Brest,
primarily for the resulting moral effect against such possible raids.
I was told yesterday by an important Admiralty official that while he
thought the chances of raids in, or escape through, the Channel by heavy
enemy forces out of reach of the Grand Fleet (North of Scotland) were
very remote, nevertheless the possibility existed and was principally
thwarted on moral grounds, that is, the uncertainty in his mind of the
opposition which would be encountered. He agreed with others, including
the First Sea Lord, that the addition of some of our heavy forces to
those maintained in southern Channel approaches by the French and
British would undoubtedly entirely preclude the possibility of such
raids.
28. _Submarine Losses_:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account